The name is absent

also those abroad because of Leakey’s apparent intimate knowledge of the
Kikuyu people, culture, and language.¹⁰

In Mau Mau and the Kikuyu, Leakey states, “The oath which was taken by
members was very carefully thought out and so worded that once a person had
taken it...there would be little risk of this reporting the facts to authorities.”¹¹
Unlike Corfield’s account, Leakey’s work addressed the cultural nuances of
oathing. Therefore, he studied oathing by analyzing aspects of the culture.
Leakey describes in detail the pre-Mau Mau oathing-taking ceremonies by
focusing on the symbolism of the number seven and the use of stones. His
explanations provide meaning and interpretations of oath activities and speak to
his understanding of the Kikuyu traditions. However, he does hold that the rules
Ofoathing changed during Mau Mau.¹²

One interesting area in this book is the impact of oathing on Christians.
Leakey states, “Mau Mau leaders...made the mistake of forcing genuine
Christians to take the oath, these people went as fast as they could and reported
the matter to the police.”¹³ He also noted the contestations between the elders
and oath administrators that questioned if the oath was the oath of the past since
it “violated all of the laws of oath-taking.”¹⁴ This theme of age remains an
interesting aspect of the oath because it shows the internal Kikuyu contestations
about oathing. In this dissertation, generational conflict comes up in the chapter

¹⁰ Louis Leakey, Маи Май and the Kikuyu, (London: Metheun and Company, Ltd., 1954) & Defeating
Mau Mau, (London: Metheun and Company, 1954), 1-20.

¹¹ Leakey, Mau Mau and the Kikuyu, ix.

¹² Leakey, Mau Mau and the Kikuyu, 55.

¹³ Leakey, Mau Mau and the Kikuyu, 101.

¹⁴ Leakey, Mau Mau and the Kikuyu, 101.

33

<<   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   >>

More intriguing information